HB 54-PLACEMENT OF A CHILD IN NEED OF AID  3:46:16 PM CHAIR HIGGINS announced that the next order of business would be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 54, "An Act relating to the identification, location, and notification of specified family members and family friends of a child who is in state custody." [In front of the committee was Version 28-LS0202\R, adopted as the working document on February 26, 2013.] REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 134, labeled 28-LS0303\R, Mischel, 4/1/13, as the working document. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT objected for discussion. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked to clarify which bill was being discussed. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER clarified that he had meant to adopt [SS]HB 54, Version R. CHAIR HIGGINS rescinded the previous motion. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for [SS]HB 54, labeled 28-LS0202\R, Mischel, 2/7/13, as the working document. 3:47:15 PM TOBY SMITH, Staff, Representative Les Gara, Alaska State Legislature, explained that there were three sections in Version R. He read from the House Bill 54 Sectional Analysis: [Included in members' packets] This section adds a new section to AS 47.10, requiring that a supervisor in the Office of Children's Services (OCS) certify in writing that a search for noncustodial parents, adult family members, and appropriate adult family friends of the child has been conducted. OCS must notify these adults of the child's removal within 30 days, unless there are extenuating circumstances. This section codifies existing OCS policy related to extended family searches, and adds the requirement of supervisor certification. This section adds a reference to the new section of statute established in Section 1. It requires that due diligence be conducted to locate extended family members before the child is placed in a foster home. This section allows the department to provide for emergency placement of a child while conducting due diligence. MR. SMITH stated that the proposed bill would not cost the state any money, and would address an accountability issue, to ensure that "front line case workers are doing the work that they are supposed to be doing, and that's in the best interests of foster youth by requiring that a supervisor sign off when a case worker has done a due diligence search." 3:49:11 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked if the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) had indicated a possibility that this would remove an option for not contacting an individual considered to be a danger to the child. MR. SMITH deferred to DHSS. 3:50:02 PM CHAIR HIGGINS opened public testimony. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT removed his objection. 3:51:05 PM AMANDA METIVIER, Statewide Coordinator, Facing Foster Care in Alaska, stated that the proposed bill ensured compliance with regulations that were already an Office of Children's Service' (OCS) policy. She noted that that there was not a cost to the state, and it could potentially save money in the search for foster homes, and for the cost of long term foster care. 3:52:59 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, noting that the proposed bill required OCS to notify a list of people, asked if this would force OCS to make contact with a non-custodial parent who they would prefer not to contact. 3:53:48 PM CHRISTY LAWTON, Director, Central Office, Office of Children's Services, Department of Health and Social Services, said that this proposed bill did not change the current requirements for contact. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked if a non-custodial parent included a parent who had lost their parental rights through the courts. MS. LAWTON opined that it would not. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked to confirm this, as this notification may not serve the best interest of the child. 3:54:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked about earlier testimony that this was required in federal law and was a policy of the DHSS. He opined that the concerns presented by Representative Keller would have already been addressed. MS. LAWTON replied that the proposed bill included elements already addressed in federal law, with some small additions that were not yet included in policy or law. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if those additions were reasonable and beneficial. MS. LAWTON said that the additions were reasonable and could provide some enhancements. 3:56:10 PM CHAIR HIGGINS asked for the reasons that OCS wanted these changes in statute. MS. LAWTON replied that she preferred a change to the regulations, instead of policy. She noted that there had been concern for whether changes in regulation were the best forum, as policy changes could have the same effect. She noted that the majority of OCS policy, procedures, and day to day practice were not covered in regulation. She offered her belief that these proposed changes were a better fit in regulation; although they would be allowable in procedure, the preferred avenue was in regulations, per the Department of Law. 3:57:47 PM CHAIR HIGGINS opined that there were too many layers of bureaucracy, and he asked if this proposed bill would be a hindrance. MS. LAWTON replied that the proposed bill did not create bureaucracy, but added components of good practice for improvement. She said that, although the amount of work for the staff would be less with a change in policy, the meaning and the intent of the proposed bill was not bureaucratic. CHAIR HIGGINS asked, if this became statute, would it invite more litigation compared to current experience. MS. LAWTON replied that she did not anticipate any increase in litigation as the majority of the aspects of the proposed bill were already in practice. 3:59:44 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked to clarify that there was nothing in the proposed bill that implied any preference for placement of a child. MS. LAWTON, in response, said that the proposed bill did outline a preference standard, but that this was a standard which OCS already used. She explained that the priority ranking was to relatives, then family friends with a relationship to the child, and then to the unrelated licensed foster care family. She declared these to be the same preferences as were currently followed. 4:01:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked to ensure that his earlier request for information be delivered to the House Judiciary Standing Committee. 4:01:32 PM CHAIR HIGGINS closed public testimony. 4:01:40 PM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSSSHB 54, Version 28- LS0202\R, Mischel, 2/7/13, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSSHB 54(HSS) was moved from the House Health and Social Services Standing Committee.